[Data-modeling] More fun with the visual art domain

Faye Li faye at metaweb.com
Thu Mar 27 22:10:42 UTC 2008 

It reads a little funny because this page currently shows a single 
instance of art acquisition, in which the "date acquired" property isn't 
filled out but the "last date owned" is. Once more data is filled out, 
there should be no problem making sense of this page. I think it adds 
value.

-- Faye


Jeff Prucher wrote:
> It's not so much the name that's weird as the actual property itself. It
> makes very good sense in the context of art owners and artworks (the date
> the owner last had title to the work; the date the work last belonged to
> that owner), but really doesn't in the context of how the work was acquired.
> We can certainly decide to live with this (we probably will), but I don't
> think I've ever encountered this pattern before, and it seemed curious.
>
> Jeff
>
>   
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: data-modeling-bounces at freebase.com 
>> [mailto:data-modeling-bounces at freebase.com] On Behalf Of Robert Cook
>> Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2008 11:52 AM
>> To: Freebase data modeling mailing list
>> Subject: Re: [Data-modeling] More fun with the visual art domain
>>
>> I think reciprocal properties are almost always useful even 
>> if the name might end up being very awkward.  It allows 
>> people to make queries without doing nutty type-reflect acrobatics.
>>
>> R
>>
>> On Mar 27, 2008, at 10:29 AM, Jeff Prucher wrote:
>>
>>     
>>> If you think it would be of interest, it's easy enough to do.
>>>
>>> *waves magic wand*
>>>
>>> There. Have a look.
>>>
>>> I think the "date last owned" property makes less intuitive 
>>>       
>> sense on 
>>     
>>> this page than it does on the "art owner" and "artwork" pages.
>>>
>>>
>>>       
>> http://sandbox.freebase.com/view/guid/9202a8c04000641f8000000007bd1b9c
>>     
>>> Jeff
>>>
>>>       
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: data-modeling-bounces at freebase.com
>>>> [mailto:data-modeling-bounces at freebase.com] On Behalf Of Faye Li
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2008 2:53 PM
>>>> To: Freebase data modeling mailing list
>>>> Subject: Re: [Data-modeling] More fun with the visual art domain
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for putting this together, Jeff.
>>>>
>>>> Have you considered making the "Artwork-owner relationship" a 
>>>> reciprocated property of "Art acquisition" type? The CVT 
>>>>         
>> makes it a 
>>     
>>>> little awkward to picture what that will look like, but I think 
>>>> there's value in seeing, at a glance, all the artworks that are 
>>>> gifts.
>>>>
>>>> One of the trade-offs of having a single Artwork type for 
>>>>         
>> both unique 
>>     
>>>> artworks, edited artworks and editions of artworks is the 
>>>>         
>> confusing 
>>     
>>>> pair of properties "Edition of" and "Editions" that will 
>>>>         
>> be empty for 
>>     
>>>> 99% of all artworks. It will burn some primitives, but I think it 
>>>> might be worthwhile in the interest of cutting down confusion to 
>>>> insert the value of "None" for those 99% of artworks. It's also 
>>>> regrettable that you can't just query an "Edition" type to see all 
>>>> artwork editions, but have to query against the "Artwork"
>>>> type for instances that have a value for property "Edition of". Oh 
>>>> well. I see the trade-offs and the reasons behind them.
>>>>
>>>> I'll leave off my regular bits about CVTs not being 
>>>>         
>> search-friendly, 
>>     
>>>> as clearly the need outranks the compromised searchability here. 
>>>> Otherwise it looks good.
>>>>
>>>> -- Faye
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Jeff Prucher wrote:
>>>>         
>>>>> In response to a request on the visual arts discussion boards
>>>>>
>>>>>           
>>>> (http://www.freebase.com/view/discuss/visual_art/artwork#/guid/
>>>> 9202a8c
>>>>         
>>>>> 040006 41f80000000072fa4ba), I've made some proposed 
>>>>>           
>> changes to the 
>>     
>>>>> artwork model, which I'd like to hear feedback on.
>>>>>
>>>>> There are three changes:
>>>>> 1) insertion of a CVT between artwork and location, to 
>>>>>           
>> track when a 
>>     
>>>>> piece has been where, and how long (insert standard
>>>>>           
>>>> discussion about
>>>>         
>>>>> time-series data here)
>>>>>
>>>>> 2) insertion of a CVT between artwork and owner. This 
>>>>>           
>> includes not 
>>     
>>>>> only dates, but the method it was acquired (e.g., purchase, gift, 
>>>>> bequest), and the purchase price
>>>>>
>>>>> 3) the addition of an "editions" property on artwork (and
>>>>>           
>>>> the reverse
>>>>         
>>>>> property, "edition of", as well). The idea here is to allow
>>>>>           
>>>> Freebase
>>>>         
>>>>> to display information about editions of a specific artwork
>>>>>           
>>>> (such as
>>>>         
>>>>> casts of a sculpture, or prints of a photograph), which may
>>>>>           
>>>> have not
>>>>         
>>>>> only different locations and owners, but also dimensions,
>>>>>           
>>>> media, and
>>>>         
>>>>> dates of creation. I decided to model edition simply as
>>>>>           
>>>> "artwork" rather than "artwork edition"
>>>>         
>>>>> because of the desire for museums and other art owners to 
>>>>>           
>> have only 
>>     
>>>>> one property describing their holdings; an "artwork edition" type 
>>>>> would have required two properties -- "artwork owned" and
>>>>>           
>>>> "artwork editions owned"
>>>>         
>>>>> which seemed unnecessarily clumsy. This does mean that 
>>>>>           
>> the abstract 
>>     
>>>>> version of the artwork and the individual edition will have
>>>>>           
>>>> a number
>>>>         
>>>>> of redundant properties, but my hope is that these can 
>>>>>           
>> just be left 
>>     
>>>>> blank. Naming of editions will be interesting, but that's
>>>>>           
>>>> an issue every time we model them.
>>>>         
>>>>> I've entered some casts of "The Thinker" (in bronze and 
>>>>>           
>> plaster) on 
>>     
>>>>> sandbox for your perusal. (I put the proposed types in a private 
>>>>> domain, so all versions of The Thinker have both the original 
>>>>> "artwork" type and a type with only the proposed additions,
>>>>>           
>>>> "artwork
>>>>         
>>>>> (test)"; pretend, if you will, that all the properties are
>>>>>           
>>>> one a single type. Let me know what you think.
>>>>         
>>>>> Domain:
>>>>> http://sandbox.freebase.com/view/domain/user/jeff/visual_art
>>>>> Examples:
>>>>> http://sandbox.freebase.com/view/en/the_thinker
>>>>>
>>>>> Jeff Prucher
>>>>> Type Librarian & Ontologist
>>>>> Metaweb Technologies, Inc.
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Data-modeling mailing list
>>>>> Data-modeling at freebase.com
>>>>> http://lists.freebase.com/mailman/listinfo/data-modeling
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>           
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Data-modeling mailing list
>>>> Data-modeling at freebase.com
>>>> http://lists.freebase.com/mailman/listinfo/data-modeling
>>>>
>>>>         
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Data-modeling mailing list
>>> Data-modeling at freebase.com
>>> http://lists.freebase.com/mailman/listinfo/data-modeling
>>>       
>> _______________________________________________
>> Data-modeling mailing list
>> Data-modeling at freebase.com
>> http://lists.freebase.com/mailman/listinfo/data-modeling
>>
>>     
>
> _______________________________________________
> Data-modeling mailing list
> Data-modeling at freebase.com
> http://lists.freebase.com/mailman/listinfo/data-modeling
>
>

More information about the Data-modeling mailing list